Part of a hope-based network
restoring and enjoying the Mahurangi

Editor Cimino Cole

Cimino 17 October 2010

As mayoral majorities go, it’s one of the slimmest.

Absolutely Wade-Brown: Although more gave their first preference to Prendergast than to Wade-Brown, the bulk of subsequent preferences—of the four candidates that were progressively eliminated—went to Wade-Brown. Chart Mahurangi Magazine

Because the democratic world is so inured to the deficiencies of first-past-the-post, it mostly goes unnoticed that mayors are typically elected by a minority vote, often a tiny minority.

Whereas Celia Wade-Brown won Wellington by an actual majority of votes cast. Which is why the incumbent’s blaming of preferential voting portrays, at best, a tragic ignorance of electoral principles:

Ms Prendergast said before today’s result was known that the single transferable vote (STV) system could cost her the election.

Clearly Kerry Prendergast feels cheated because she wasn’t conferred an advantage by first-past-the-post, a system notorious for electing other-than the most preferred candidate. Mind, Ms Prendergast would probably consider herself in good company since the Auckland governance royal commissioners were similarly woefully oblivious to the flaws of first-past-the-post.

Fortunately for Makaurau, its first mayor, Len Brown, enjoys such massive electoral success that it can’t be diminished by being a first-past-the-post win.

Meantime, Wellington City’s thrilling come-from-behind preferential voting election result is not currently possible in national elections. This because electorate members are elected by first-past-the-post. Had the competition been for the Wellington Central seat, as opposed to the mayoralty, the less preferred Prendergast would have been successful.

Close Call Celia: Wade-Brown, by a whisker, was preferred by more Wellingtonians than was incumbent Mayor Prendergast.
Image Celia for Mayor

Because the election was all but a draw, it could be argued that had Prendergast had the benefit of first-past-the-post, and gained a fourth term as mayor, no grave injustice would have occurred. But with a comfortable first-past-the-post majority of more than 3000, the mayor was unlikely to have behaved in the inclusive manner that Celia Wade-Brown now signals:

Although Wellington has spoken for a change, it’s a very close call, so it’s doubly important to involve people and consult, as was my intention anyway.

Some voting systems, including for the French presidency, involve runoff elections. With robust online polling in place, runoff elections could occur over say a weekend, which would add to the drama and help motivate citizens to participate. Local government voter turnout is generally lamentably low. This year the average turnout was boosted by 3.5%, to 47.5%, thanks to interest generated by the first Makaurau election. It is clear that the high-profile Banks–Brown race to head a region of 1.4‍ ‍million was responsible for the above average turnout of 50.5%. In comparison to Aucklanders, only 40.2% of Wellingtonians voted.

The reason runoff elections are not used universally, of course, is cost and time—in a volatile country, delay could encourage a coup d'état.

Be that as it may, single transferable voting is in effect an instant runoff system. It allows voters to express their preferences in a straightforward way. Tactical voting is unnecessary. In Wellington, for example, the supporters of blogger and campaigner-against-water-privatisation Pepperell overwhelmingly preferred Wade-Brown to Prendergast; likewise, Yan supporters. Under first-past-the-post, those who persisted in supporting Pepperell and Yan would have wasted their votes. In the event, with preferential voting, they were key to voting Prendergast out.

Shirtcliffe: ‘It is an outrage. We should be rearing up on our hind legs about the delay in getting rid of [MMP].’
Team 1 2 3 Tune-Up MMP: ‘The only outrage will be if we are not permitted to fix MMP.’
Cartoon Majorlook Productions

Ironically, next year’s referendum on mixed member proportional is a runoff referendum, potentially.

The first referendum decides if mixed member proportional should be replaced, and if so, by a selection of four other systems.

If New Zealanders vote to change from mixed member proportional, the runoff referendum would be held between it and the other system favoured attracting the most support.

While the provision for the runoff is preferable to the prospect of mixed member proportional being ditched in 2011, there are three glaring deficiencies in the referendum programme.

The first is the option of tuning up mixed member proportional has been omitted, although justice minister Simon Power has promised that the system, if retained, will be ‘reviewed’. The clear message is, tick the option:

I vote to retain the MMP voting system.

If the Mahurangi Magazine had its druthers, a fifth option would have read:

I would choose a tuned-up MMP system.

Aside from that omission, the greatest flaw in the options listed is that two preferential voting systems are included. This means that supporters of preferential voting will have their vote fatality split between the two options:

I would choose the Preferential Voting system.

I would choose the Single Transferable Vote system.

The difference between the two, as defined by the referendum, is principally that the former has single-member electorates and latter multi-member electorates. Voters hugely prefer single member electorates, but unfortunately the system penalises small parties almost as savagely as first-past-the-post—Australia has only just elected its first Green federal parliament member. Preferential voting with single-member seats is almost as non-proportional as first-past-the-post.

Whether deliberate or not, the inclusion of two preferential voting systems gives first-past-the-post the front running, despite prime minister John Key’s strongly signalled support for the supplementary member system—first-past-the-post with a few extra members thrown in to make ever-so-slightly proportional.

The deep irony here is that overlapping options would not be problematic, if voters in the referendum were allowed to rank their preferences. That way, if a voter’s first preference is STV, and second preference PV, the voter’s stronger preference for preferential is captured.

If the vote in 2011 is to change the system, the runoff in 2014 will almost certainly be between first-past-the-post and mixed member proportional. Peter Shirtcliffe and others will throw their millions at attempting to resurrect first-past-the-post.

There are clear reasons why two-party parliamentary systems came into being, and persisted for so long. But the move to multiple parties cannot be reversed in democracies, and thus electoral systems must be fully proportional to be democratic. Mixed member proportional is the Rolls-Royce of proportional voting systems, potentially.

Aotearoa’s implementation of mixed member proportional has defects, many of which stem from it’s use of first-past-the-post—both to elect electorate members and to indicate party preference. All it needs, to become the Silver Cloud of electoral systems, is for voters to be permitted to rank their preferences.

It needs preferential pinned on: 1 2 3 tune-up MMP!



Footnote  This is what a more robust referendum might have looked like:

Part A Should the current MMP voting system be retained as is, or changed/replaced?

• • I vote to retain the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) voting system as is
• • I vote to change MMP or change to another voting system.

Part B Regardless of how you voted under Part A, if there was a change to the voting system, which option would you choose?

• • I would choose the First Past the Post system (FPP)
• • I would choose the Preferential Mixed Member Proportional system (PMMP)
• • I would choose the Preferential Voting system (PV)
• • I would choose the Single Transferable Vote system (STV)
• • I would choose the Supplementary Member system (SM).

1 2 3, tune-up MMP:
Very Near to Being World’s Best Electoral System
Ranking Not Ticking to Tame Party Lists
Dispatching Electoral Commission Review Room Elephants
Overdue Tune-Up will Leave MMP Better Loved than Understood
Tactics and Polls or Preference Voting
Mixed Member Means Rout No Landslide
Supplementary Member in Practice is Mixed Member Disproportional
Graduatedly and Preferentially Fixing the Fixed Threshold
Possible Change in Six Years or Definite Change in Three
Electoral Commission Review and Mixed Member Misinformation
Green Party Dependant Upon Proportional and Preferential
Party Vote Green Growth for a Richer Aotearoa
Fascination with the Beauty of Models
First-Past-The-Post ‘Win’ Argument for Preferential
National’s Power Sets Scene to Retain and Change MMP
Prendergast Loss Somehow Pinned on Preferential
Ultimately Successful Mäori Roll Model
MMP Could be Ninety-Nine Not Out
Out of All Proportional Aussies Eat Their Greens
Voting For and Against and With First-Past-the-Post
Aotearoa has MMP Half Right
Cartoon: Shucks Shirty
Proportional Preferential and What’s to fix with MMP

Part of a hope-based network restoring and enjoying the Mahurangi
 Editor Cimino Cole